BravadoGT:nekom: Does he have the votes? It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't. Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them. Or not. It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.

Well, if you say you're going to do something then don't you do tend to lose credibility. I wish I understood enough about the situation to have an opinion, I have no idea who or what to root for here, a Syria where children are NOT being killed is probably too much to ask for just yet, sadly.

You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.

Sliding Carp:mediablitz: We've found the ONE THING Republicans will agree with Obama on. Killing...

Oh, they'll be against it as soon as the pictures of dead kids in rubble show up.

Depends on whether the kids are brown or not. If not, it'll be a "horrible tragedy." If so, it'll be "collateral damage" that, while regrettable, is a necessary component of bringing freedom to the ignorant savages.

Weaver95:You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.

nekom:BravadoGT: nekom: Does he have the votes? It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't. Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them. Or not. It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.

Well, if you say you're going to do something then don't you do tend to lose credibility. I wish I understood enough about the situation to have an opinion, I have no idea who or what to root for here, a Syria where children are NOT being killed is probably too much to ask for just yet, sadly.

Given Russia's aggressive posturing over the whole thing, the Israel angle, the numerous other conflicts that are ongoing in the region, this is not exactly a far-fetched possibility. It's not nearly as "simple" as Iraq was as far as geopolitical alignments are involved.

That said, WWIII this is unlikely to become. I think it would be more likely to happen if AQ got their hands on a large amount of chemical weapons as we'd see their attacks become a lot more devastating and see a much worse response from the first world.

DamnYankees:nekom: Does he have the votes? It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't. Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

Why is it stupid to say the way he'll vote? There's no connection between his beliefs on the matter and whether or not the thing will pass.

Well, doesn't it make him look impotent? If he doesn't have the votes, I wouldn't think he'd have said that, but I could be wrong. I'm just a spectator in all this, I have no idea if bombing them is a good idea or not.

cman:nekom: BravadoGT: nekom: Does he have the votes? It would make him look pretty stupid if he said that and didn't. Not that he hasn't made an ass of himself before

He'll get them. Or not. It doesn't matter--at this point, it's more about Obama's ego now, so it's going to happen.

Well, if you say you're going to do something then don't you do tend to lose credibility. I wish I understood enough about the situation to have an opinion, I have no idea who or what to root for here, a Syria where children are NOT being killed is probably too much to ask for just yet, sadly.

This

Pretty much we're farked no matter what we do on it

So our solution to ending senseless killing is to...kill a bunch of people at random and hope that the heartless sons of biatches who have no souls running the syrian government are what...Gonna suddenly start behaving themselves?

Weaver95:You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.

Oh jeebus christ!!

Really?! You're putting this at the feet of the Republicans? The Democrat President says that he wants to do and that he's going to do it either way and somehow this is a Republican's war?!

The only way I would support this is if the President said he was going to do this either way, which I think he has. But I still believe that politics end at the water's edge. The President is going to do this. Either he can do this with Congress's blessing or without it. For the good of the nation I think we need to go to war with a whole and intact effort.

Weaver95:So our solution to ending senseless killing is to...kill a bunch of people at random and hope that the heartless sons of biatches who have no souls running the syrian government are what...Gonna suddenly start behaving themselves?

I have this slim hope that they have delayed because they have a good plan for nailing the chemical weapons without causeing much bloodshed.

I don't think so, but I don't really like these kinds of meta-questions anyways. Do you think it makes him weak? I don't - I believe in many things that would never pass the House, even if it was full of liberals like me. Doesn't make me weak, so why would that make him weak?

The Stealth Hippopotamus:Weaver95: You know...if the GOP wants to kill people in the middle east then maybe we should air drop the first born of every member of congress into Syria with a full combat load out and let them sort it out for us.

Oh jeebus christ!!

Really?! You're putting this at the feet of the Republicans? The Democrat President says that he wants to do and that he's going to do it either way and somehow this is a Republican's war?!

The only way I would support this is if the President said he was going to do this either way, which I think he has. But I still believe that politics end at the water's edge. The President is going to do this. Either he can do this with Congress's blessing or without it. For the good of the nation I think we need to go to war with a whole and intact effort.

Well the article DOES talk about the GOP so...yeah, I guess it's fair to call them out on this issue.

Weaver95:So our solution to ending senseless killing is to...kill a bunch of people at random and hope that the heartless sons of biatches who have no souls running the syrian government are what...Gonna suddenly start behaving themselves?

The only thing we can do is make things worse.

Yep, this pretty much sums up the situation. And Obama's "strategy," if you can call it that, doesn't really seem any more sophisticated than that. Just once I'd like to hear a clear explanation of what they think they can accomplish by this, or any reasoning that boils down to anything other than "Well, we gotta do something! I mean, Assad crossed that red line, or at least we're pretty sure that Assad was the one responsible anyway."

I don't think so, but I don't really like these kinds of meta-questions anyways. Do you think it makes him weak? I don't - I believe in many things that would never pass the House, even if it was full of liberals like me. Doesn't make me weak, so why would that make him weak?

Well, isn't his job kind of to get his party to fall in line? If he can't do that, maybe they need someone who can. Not that I really blame him mind you, he's got a damned near impossible job, but I would think he wouldn't want to say something like that unless he DID have the votes. Which if true means I guess we're hitting Syria soon. I could be wrong, just what I'm reading into it

I think you underestimate smart weapons. We're not sending B-52s into Laos, here.

Smart weapons didn't get saddam. That came down to good old fashioned boots on the ground foot work. I very much doubt our booming runs would slow down the killing and violence in Syria. We are just going to make things worse.

I think you underestimate smart weapons. We're not sending B-52s into Laos, here.

Smart weapons didn't get saddam. That came down to good old fashioned boots on the ground foot work. I very much doubt our booming runs would slow down the killing and violence in Syria. We are just going to make things worse.

Weaver95:I just can't see any way where bombing Syria works out well for anyone.

Perhaps it will serve as a deterrent for further use of chemical weapons? Perhaps destroying chemical weapons stockpiles are the objective? I'm not sold either, but I'm wide open to ideas. As a father, the photos and video I've seen out of the area are OBSCENE. But that alone isn't necessarily the best reason to get your war on. I hope somehow it gets better there, but that's just wishful thinking on my part. I'm glad I'm not the one that has to make these kinds of decisions, and I hope Obama has "studied this out" properly.

Of course the list of potential downsides to using military force there is fairly obvious, especially if this would regional war theory pans out. Worst case scenario Israel and Iran get involved in this and it's a category 5 shiatstorm.

nekom:Weaver95: I just can't see any way where bombing Syria works out well for anyone.

Perhaps it will serve as a deterrent for further use of chemical weapons? Perhaps destroying chemical weapons stockpiles are the objective? I'm not sold either, but I'm wide open to ideas. As a father, the photos and video I've seen out of the area are OBSCENE. But that alone isn't necessarily the best reason to get your war on. I hope somehow it gets better there, but that's just wishful thinking on my part. I'm glad I'm not the one that has to make these kinds of decisions, and I hope Obama has "studied this out" properly.

Of course the list of potential downsides to using military force there is fairly obvious, especially if this would regional war theory pans out. Worst case scenario Israel and Iran get involved in this and it's a category 5 shiatstorm.

Even if by some miracle we hit a high value target...the killing will STILL continue.

The Stealth Hippopotamus:Weaver95: Um...you do realize the GOP wants this war, right? Looks like both parties want to keep blowing shiat up. So here we are, bipartisan cooperation at last. Ain't we lucky?

And you know the GOP wants this war because? Did you get the memo that I missed? Or is this just "well of course the GOP wants a war"?

Quick quiz who was the POTUS for World War I? WW2? Vietnam? Koren War? When you want a really big nasty war you got to vote Democrat.

There are a LOT of proxies involved here. If Syria/Hezbollah launch a deadly attack against Israel--what makes you so sure the USA and Russia will stay out of it?

Syria and Israel have fought several wars since Syria became a Soviet/Russian client, and each time resulted in Israeli aircraft doing victory loops around Damascus. Russia ain't done dick in any of them. The real question is what makes you think that THIS TIME it'll be different?